CIVIL PROCEDURE (writ of prohibition, UTMA accounting): Peter v. Schultz-Gibson (C0A 1/29/2010)

Peter v. Schultz-Gibson
2009-CA-001151 01/29/2010 2010 WL 323076

Opinion and order by Senior Judge Knopf; Judges Keller and Stumbo concurred. The Court denied a petition for a writ of prohibition wherein petitioner argued that the circuit court acted outside of its jurisdiction by maintaining jurisdiction of a complaint brought seeking an accounting as to funds originally held by petitioner under Kentucky’s Uniform Transfers to Minors Act (UTMA). The Court held that, under the circumstances, the accounting was correctly pursued in circuit court. KRS 385.192 was applicable only when a minor, or someone acting on his behalf, was involved. The use of the subject funds prior to the real party in interest’s majority and the use of the funds afterward became inextricably intertwined. Therefore, the circuit court could exercise its general subject-matter jurisdiction to consider an equitable remedy.

Please note: I reserve the right to delete comments that are inappropriate, offensive or off-topic.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.